Political contribution deductions require genuine transactions; banking records and party registration alone cannot defeat evidence of accommodation e...
Post-death GST liability permits fresh proceedings against legal representatives, while discontinued-business recovery remains limited to the inherite...
Non-confirmation of FEMA seizure prevents adjudicators from overriding pending appellate findings on recorded reasons and suspected foreign asset hold...
ITAT upheld validity of reopening, finding that approval under s.151 was recorded on the ITBA on 29.03.2018 and thereby authorised issuance of notice under s.148, rejecting the assessee's challenge to reopening. On merits, ITAT recognised PBPT adjudication holding the transaction benami and identifying multiple beneficial owners; consequently ITAT held the entire addition could not be charged solely to the assessee under s.69 and directed restoration to the AO for re-adjudication and allocation of unexplained investment among joint beneficial owners in accordance with PBPT orders. The appellate order of CIT(A) was set aside, and reliance on incomplete VSVS filings was held not to be a conclusive admission.
ITAT upheld validity of reopening, finding that approval under s.151 was recorded on the ITBA on 29.03.2018 and thereby authorised issuance of notice under s.148, rejecting the assessee's challenge to reopening. On merits, ITAT recognised PBPT adjudication holding the transaction benami and identifying multiple beneficial owners; consequently ITAT held the entire addition could not be charged solely to the assessee under s.69 and directed restoration to the AO for re-adjudication and allocation of unexplained investment among joint beneficial owners in accordance with PBPT orders. The appellate order of CIT(A) was set aside, and reliance on incomplete VSVS filings was held not to be a conclusive admission.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.